I agree. Morneau, Span, and Willingham should've been moved last trading deadline. I worry that Ryan will move Parmalee instead of Morneau or Willingham. Intercourse the money left of the former's contract. And Willingham is due to regree and/or get injured.

I agree with Jim, they should be willing to do this, but will not do this. I do not for a moment think they'll sign 3 legit free agents. I do not think they'll deal really good/great prospects for MLB players.

i think the most intriguing thing about this trade might be that new marlins manager, mike redmond, had been managing in toronto's system and might have been personally responsible for many of the prospects miami will receive, both as pieces of the trade and as a minor league manager. i think redmond managed marisnick this season in class A at dunedin of the florida state league. redmond may be sly like columbo, and the owner of the marlins may have just cleaned the canvas for more painting, and not be done...... but jeff loria has done some kinda shady/slanted (expos to mlb/then buying marlins with a loan for the difference from mlb in 2002) dealings in the past. oh, as an aside......... i think it should just be world series championship - not .....ships - , as the first marlin's championship loria was not a part of as owner.

I agree. Morneau, Span, and Willingham should've been moved last trading deadline. I worry that Ryan will move Parmalee instead of Morneau or Willingham. Intercourse the money left of the former's contract. And Willingham is due to regree and/or get injured.

Ummm...I agree with everything you said except intercoursing the money.....

Couldn't agree more. TR has proven that he's only capable of thinking small. For all of the praise he got for signing Willingham and Doumit, we need to keep in mind that the few moves he made last offseason netted the team exactly three wins over their dismal 2011 campaign. The current Twins simply cannot see the big picture, and seem completely adverse to any free-agent risk -- other than their death-by-a-thousand-cuts dabbles in the mlb dumpsters. I doubt TR was even in on any of the trade conversations with Miami. The fans will have to demand change soon.

Toronto was a last place team--but a much better team than the last place Twins. Doesn't Toronto consider all of Canada "local broadcast revenue"--thus not shared with the rest of MLB? If so, that amount could easily dwarf what the Twins collect. Sorry, I don't have a figure for Toronto's local broadcast revenue. I do think that blaming Ryan for the deal between Toronto and Miami is unfair. There may not have ever been any discussion between Minnesota and Miami, or when the terms were "add $35MM/year in payroll...", Ryan's answer was likely "Not permitted."

Agree 100% with J.C.Let's give Terry Ryan a little time here. Pitchers and Catchers don't report for 3 months yet. Trades are always great fodder for the Hot Stove League. Connie Mack dismantled 2 World Champion teams, in the teens; Frank 'Home Run' Baker, Eddie Collins et al. Then again in the 30's with Jimmy Foxx, 'Lefty' Grove, Al Simmons and others.I remember growing up ... Harvey Kuenn for Rocky Colovito ... man I was knocked back on my 10yr. old butt by that one!Let's wait a bit to see what TR does.

Toronto was a last place team--but a much better team than the last place Twins. Doesn't Toronto consider all of Canada "local broadcast revenue"--thus not shared with the rest of MLB? If so, that amount could easily dwarf what the Twins collect. Sorry, I don't have a figure for Toronto's local broadcast revenue. I do think that blaming Ryan for the deal between Toronto and Miami is unfair. There may not have ever been any discussion between Minnesota and Miami, or when the terms were "add $35MM/year in payroll...", Ryan's answer was likely "Not permitted."

The Jays television contract with Sportsnet (also owned by Rogers), essentially makes all of Canada the Jays region.As lucrative as that may sound, it's not, according to the Globe and Mail it netted them $36M last season. Part of the reason for that is that the Jays actually fight for market share with a number of teams outside of Toronto, Manitoba easily has as many Twins fans as Jays fans and the Red Sox are very popular in the Maritimes.

That and fans being forced to listen to Buck Martinez and Pat Tabler 162 times.

One other downside of the national agreement is that is makes every Blue Jays game a blackout throughout Canada on MLB.TV.

The Jays television contract with Sportsnet (also owned by Rogers), essentially makes all of Canada the Jays region.As lucrative as that may sound, it's not, according to the Globe and Mail it netted them $36M last season.

If another company owned the Blue Jays that figure would be substantially higher. The Jays are owned by a cable company which owns sports networks in Canada. The 36M is a figure they made up to pay themselves and doesn't reflect the reality of the situation.

This is from Forbes magazine.

But Toronto is owned by $14 billion-in-sales Rogers Communications, which also owns sports channels that pump through Blue Jays games as well as those of its other two teams, the NBA’s Raptors and NHL’s Maple Leafs. The company’s strategy of using sports programming to boost profits has been paying off and shares of Rogers have been outperforming the market recently. On top of the increase in carrier fees Rogers can command from its sports programming, last year Rogers Sportsnet paid the Blue Jays a rights fee of $36 million. So Rogers gets a doubleheader from its sports programming. The Blue Jays have a much larger cable television audience than the Marlins and thus star power on the diamond can translate into much more money from advertisers.

It does dwarf the twins revenue, the 36 million is a fee they basically pay to themselves and really doesn't represent anything. Rogers Tv network paid Rogers sports team. They could have made the figure higher for example 180 million if they were selling the team to show how much revenue it brings in. So where they make their money is in advertising, cable company carrier fees (from competing cable companies for example Shaw in canada) and shares in the Rogers company. It's a different model.

The Jays television contract with Sportsnet (also owned by Rogers), essentially makes all of Canada the Jays region.As lucrative as that may sound, it's not, according to the Globe and Mail it netted them $36M last season.

If another company owned the Blue Jays that figure would be substantially higher. The Jays are owned by a cable company which owns sports networks in Canada. The 36M is a figure they made up to pay themselves and doesn't reflect the reality of the situation.

This is from Forbes magazine.

But Toronto is owned by $14 billion-in-sales Rogers Communications, which also owns sports channels that pump through Blue Jays games as well as those of its other two teams, the NBA’s Raptors and NHL’s Maple Leafs. The company’s strategy of using sports programming to boost profits has been paying off and shares of Rogers have been outperforming the market recently. On top of the increase in carrier fees Rogers can command from its sports programming, last year Rogers Sportsnet paid the Blue Jays a rights fee of $36 million. So Rogers gets a doubleheader from its sports programming. The Blue Jays have a much larger cable television audience than the Marlins and thus star power on the diamond can translate into much more money from advertisers.

It does dwarf the twins revenue, the 36 million is a fee they basically pay to themselves and really doesn't represent anything. Rogers Tv network paid Rogers sports team. They could have made the figure higher for example 180 million if they were selling the team to show how much revenue it brings in. So where they make their money is in advertising, cable company carrier fees (from competing cable companies for example Shaw in canada) and shares in the Rogers company. It's a different model.

Then is it fair to conclude that the Jays "swim in money" and can easily afford to take on the added payroll from the Miami trade?

If your parent company is making $14 billion in advertising sales I'd say so. Plus the added payroll could easily be negated with increased advertising costs due to an increase in market share expected from the new look Jays. As I mentioned in another thread if they were to add Justin Morneau (Captain Canada in baseball), he alone would probably bring in many new sponsors and advertisers to Rogers Sportsnet and increase views of their games which would boost the ammount they could charge for advertising on their stations. Rogers is also the largest owner of Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment which owns the NBA's Toronto Raptors and tried this already with huge money that was offered to lure Steve Nash (Captain Canada of basketball) even though Nash took much less to sign with the Lakers. So anyone who thinks Rogers (Jays owners) wouldn't accept Morneau's contract isn't looking at the big picture.

The point is that the Twins could do the same thing... they could add players that would generate greater enthusiasm by the fan base and thus with advertisers. But nibbling around the edges of the talent pool won't bring an extra nickel of revenue in. To sell more tickets and advertising, they would need to be bold enough to convince people they're serious about getting back in the hunt this year. That's what the Jays have done and there's no reason the Twins couldn't do the same thing.

"The Twins have historically told the public that their model is to spend about 50% of revenues on their Major League payroll. That goes back all the way through the old Metrodome days when the team had one of the worst revenue streams in MLB and it has continued through the “boom” years of their new ballpark. If they hold to that model, only half of the “new money” from the media deal will see its way in to their payroll budget.

But why should that be the case? What additional expenses come with that $25 million in additional revenue? Absolutely none. It is simply “found money” that comes with no strings attached"

Exactly. There is no reason an increase in revenue should equate to an increase in operating expenses. I always thought that way with the new stadium revenue. Does it cost more to operate from the new stadium? I doubt it. But you have found the perfect example. There is NO WAY that getting additional TV money increases costs.

I've been posting for two years that the "52 percent of revenue to payroll" model of the metrodome no longer made sense. I'm sure there are added expenses to running TF, but nowhere near the added revenue.

The only thing that makes sense is, they're using that extra revenue to pay for their share of building the stadium. The Pohlads promised to contribute their own money, but aren't actually contributing a penny. The borrowed the money, and are paying it off from stadium. The state, taxpayers, and those who attend games are, in effect, paying 100 percent of the cost of TF.

And that's why the Twins don't have a $125m payroll, which they could, if the Pohlads were contributing to stadium construction costs, as they promised to do.

I would imagine there are also differences between the Twins being recipients of revenue sharing dollars while playing at the Dome and being contributors of revenue sharing dollars at TF, but because the Twins are uber-secretive about their finances, we'll never know. And as long as they're unwilling to share even the broadest levels of information about their revenues and expenses, as far as I'm concerned, they're fair game for critical speculation as long as they continue to try to pawn off a crappy product on the field to their fans as being Major League Baseball. If they put a high quality product on the field, I don't give a damn how much money they line their own pockets with.

No the Twins shouldn't follow the Blue Jays Bold league, taking on one awful contract and another huge contract that most likely will be bad is not a good way to run a team, it will fail for the Dodgers and it will fail for the Blue Jays long term.

Holy hell you would think the Blue Jays learned their lesson after Rios and Wells, but nope!!

Well the Twins would have to find another Marlins-esque team willing to just give immense talent away for a very questionable return. So . . . no one else is going to do that. The Marlins organization is just barbaric!